Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Biotech / Medical : Cadus Pharmaceutical Corp. (KDUS) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BulbaMan who wrote (198)	6/14/2000 5:29:00 PM
From: scaram(o)uche	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1833

BM: The "response" has been low volume. Could be smart people. Could be those who have gotten tired of waiting. Could be poorly informed paranoid sorts. I see no upside to the cross-license, but a friend does (thinks it might be house cleaning by Merck, prior to a settlement). For all we know, OSI may have gotten nearly their standard package, and insisted on rights to the Sibia patents as a "just in case". Perhaps Merck forced Sibia into the deal as a smoke screen, as leverage at some distant negotiation. I don't see any reason for OSI to license if ex-Cadus personnel believe that Sibia will lose. OTOH, there is more to the Sibia patent estate than the claims which are contested. It's almost a kind of win-win for some KDUS shareholders. I'm looking at royalty flow, from OSI-proprietary or from OSI-Solvay, for 2005 and beyond. The stronger the intellectual property behind such, the more assured my investment in KDUS. Don't misunderstand me.... I'd like the (now) $19M. Comer versus Levin.... the textbook on how to assure than everyone loses. (Except me and others like me! Won twice, looking for a third.) Cheers! Rick